Is the wave function a relative wave (entanglement)

QuantumHop
Messages
68
Reaction score
0
Is the wave function a "relative" wave (entanglement)

Alice and Bob build a quantum entanglement experiment with the help of a lab technician.

The experiment runs and a quantum entangled pair is created but unbeknown to Alice & Bob the technician puts his own measuring device in the experiment and takes a measurement before Alice & Bob get a chance to do their measurement.

When Alice & Bob make their measurements they are confronted with the same uncertainties , Alice makes a measurement and assumes the wave collapses but the assistant had already collapsed the wave.

With that said is the collapse of the wave relative to the observer?
 
Physics news on Phys.org


QuantumHop said:
Alice and Bob build a quantum entanglement experiment with the help of a lab technician.

The experiment runs and a quantum entangled pair is created but unbeknown to Alice & Bob the technician puts his own measuring device in the experiment and takes a measurement before Alice & Bob get a chance to do their measurement.

When Alice & Bob make their measurements they are confronted with the same uncertainties , Alice makes a measurement and assumes the wave collapses but the assistant had already collapsed the wave.

With that said is the collapse of the wave relative to the observer?

Alice and Bob, in this case, won't get the correlated (same/opposite) measurement.

If Alice shows 1/up, Bob won't necessarily show 0/down because time has passed since the lab technician made his measurement. The two photons' states start to evolve separately after the technician's measurement.
 


San K said:
Alice and Bob, in this case, won't get the correlated (same/opposite) measurement.

If Alice shows 1/up, Bob won't necessarily show 0/down because time has passed since the lab technician made his measurement. The two photons' states start to evolve separately after the technician's measurement.

Thanks for the explanation, I had no idea that the entangled properties were disentangled after a measurement is taken. I see now why it can be used to determine if private message has been read by somebody else :smile:
 


This now raises another question, if both particles are measured at exactly the same time and then say a thousandth of a second later the same measurements are repeated will they still be entangled?
 


QuantumHop said:
This now raises another question, if both particles are measured at exactly the same time and then say a thousandth of a second later the same measurements are repeated will they still be entangled?
No. You should focus on the uncertainty principle(a cornerstone of qm) and why it was immediately clear to the founders of qm why entanglement of position/momentum would ensue between interacting particles(later confirmed in experiments). Entanglement is basically a confirmation of the Uncertainty principle over all of spacetime and across all frames of reference(i.e. in that sense, it's not relative to the observer and appears to happen instantaneously as far as current experiments can reveal).
 
Last edited:


Maui said:
No. You should focus on the uncertainty principle(a cornerstone of qm) and why it was immediately clear to the founders of qm why entanglement of position/momentum would ensue between interacting particles(later confirmed in experiments). Entanglement is basically a confirmation of the Uncertainty principle over all of spacetime and across all frames of reference(i.e. in that sense, it's not relative to the observer and appears to happen instantaneously as far as current experiments can reveal).

Thanks for the confirmation on loss of entanglement after the first measurement, I must say that when seen on TV this seems to be a fact that I have never heard. I've often wondered what was so special about the claims of entanglement and its not until you realize that the property is broken when measured that it becomes "odd".

If you could entangle three particles at once you could communicate instantly over any distance by sending two streams to a receiver and keeping one stream of particles for yourself. if after say one year the two streams reached the recipients you could measure particles in your stream and the discrepancies at their end would contain the message. With that said its probably impossible otherwise it violates speed c.
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...

Similar threads

Back
Top